Apple and Microsoft at odds over SkyDrive app subscription fees [ux2]

1235

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 105
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by GadgetCanada View Post


     


    I think Apples terms are the app store price cannot be higher if the app or service is available through another portal.



     


    That is called a most favored nations clause. In the case of Apple, it only applies to books, and maybe music. Apple will let you sell the in app purchase for more through the apps store. As somebody else pointed out, there are plenty of apps that cost money on the app store, but are free (but ad supported) on Android. 

  • Reply 82 of 105
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member

    Quote:

    Apple is pushing for a 30 percent cut of subscriptions garnered from iOS users.


     


     


    I had a feeling this is what the discussions were really about. Apple isn't pushing for anything. Apple has rules that apply to all developers, including Microsoft. Microsoft is the one pushing, and Apple is not likely budging. It can't have a special Microsoft rule. 

  • Reply 83 of 105

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post





    Apple doesn't host anything - except the original app - when the app makers have their own billing system, and hosting service. As for the app store that's forced on the users.

    If a future version of Windows were to force all applications to be signed and downloaded through their app store, including iTunes, and then demanded 30% from Apple eliminating apples margin I expect the arguments would be different here.


     


    this is exactly right.  apple displays more monopolistic behavior than Microsoft has in the past 10 yrs or so.  it makes me want to dump my iOS devices and go to android or wp8

  • Reply 84 of 105

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by UltimateKylie View Post


    ... The problem is taking that to established players like Microsoft Office.  What happens when a user who has been thinking about getting an iPad, finally jumps in because he hears there is Office.  Does Apple really deserve that 30%? ...



     


    I'm sorry, but I don't understand why "established players" should get some sort of special treatment. Is the point to discourage "new players" from getting into the market?


     


    I also don't understand why your hypothetical user bought an iPad and not a surface if the only reason they are buying is for Office.


     


     


    Quote:


    ... And then there are grey lines.  There is reports that Microsoft wanted to remove in app purchases, Apple is saying no.  I speculate because of grey lines. ...



     


    You're speculating because you wanted to make a particular statement without any facts to back it up, so you created grey lines.

  • Reply 85 of 105
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


     


    I'm sorry, but I don't understand why "established players" should get some sort of special treatment. Is the point to discourage "new players" from getting into the market?


     


    I also don't understand why your hypothetical user bought an iPad and not a surface if the only reason they are buying is for Office.


     


     



     


    So you would prefer people who use MS at work, and have Office, buy a Surface. That is the absurdity of these rules.

  • Reply 86 of 105
    What is interesting to me is how none of the mac websites have publicized that when you share a file from the skydrive website it doesn't open, stream or work at all an ANY iPad. To be fare it does work on iPhones and iPod Touches etc.. and on Macs but not on any iPad.
  • Reply 87 of 105

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post


     


    So you would prefer people who use MS at work, and have Office, buy a Surface. That is the absurdity of these rules.



     


    If that's the only reason you are buying a tablet, as in the hypothetical situation given, that would seem to be your best bet since Microsoft always makes sure Office works best on its own platforms. Admittedly, it's far fetched, but that was his scenario.

  • Reply 88 of 105
    jlanddjlandd Posts: 873member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    Sorry folks, but I'm so not caring about some fee-based storage app on iOS peddled by a company that grows more irrelevant by the second. 



     


     


    Maybe.  But a lot of people (myself included) feel SkyDrive is a very good cloud choice for business and iCloud isn't even on the radar.  So while I have no MS love and rarely use their products, SkyDrive is well worth the fee.  I generally use SkyDrive for large amounts of backups and storage, DropBox for easy sharing of smaller files and iCloud for backing up my Apple idevices.  


     


    MS may truly suck as a company, but iCloud is behind SkyDrive in usefulness for many folks.

  • Reply 89 of 105

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


     


     


    It isn't very tough. Apple's policy is simple. If Apple's helps you sell something for actual money, it wants a 30 percent cut. It brought you a customer. Apple's gauge of whether it is helping somebody sell something is if the party offers a pay option through its iOS app. Apple also does not want developers to permanently advertise on their iOS apps that they can purchase something through another means by doing as you suggest offer a link that opens else place. Apple will not approve the app with such a link. 


     


    Apple's view is we let developers host apps in our App Store and don't charge them anything to do it UNLESS they make money from being on the App Store. Apple excludes advertising money. Developers keep all of that. 


     


    If Microsoft removes the in app upgrade and any in app links to where people can get more storage, this will only effect people who know about the options for additional storage through Apple. People who already used Skydrive aren't hurt at all. So, Apple's practice is fair.


     


    This is the same way Apple treats companies like Netflix and Amazon. Neither Netflix or Amazon offer in app purchases for this reason. 


     


     


    If I use iOS device to buy something from eBay, should I pay 30% to Apple?


  • Reply 90 of 105

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by macfb6 View Post

    If I use iOS device to buy something from eBay, should I pay 30% to Apple?


     


    You should really try not to embarrass yourself this badly, but it's rare we see so many things wrong with such short posts.


     


    First of all, people buying things on their iOS devices don't, "pay 30% to Apple." They don't pay anything to Apple, unless they are buying something from Apple.


     


    Secondly, developers are not permitted to sell "real world goods" using In-App Purchasing. So, if you download an app and use it to buy something on eBay, it won't be using In-App Purchasing, and no one will be paying 30% of anything to Apple unless Apple is the one selling what you bought on eBay.


     


    Please, if you just absolutely have no idea what you are talking about, educate yourself a bit before you post.

  • Reply 91 of 105
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    anonymouse wrote: »
    You should really try not to embarrass yourself this badly, but it's rare we see so many things wrong with such short posts.

    First of all, people buying things on their iOS devices don't, "pay 30% to Apple." They don't pay anything to Apple, unless they are buying something from Apple.

    Secondly, developers are not permitted to sell "real world goods" using In-App Purchasing. So, if you download an app and use it to buy something on eBay, it won't be using In-App Purchasing, and no one will be paying 30% of anything to Apple unless Apple is the one selling what you bought on eBay.

    Please, if you just absolutely have no idea what you are talking about, educate yourself a bit before you post.

    annoymouse the great defender of the IAP ripoff. Not getting paid by Apple but their greatest defender.

    It's simple. This policy is wrong and misguided. It stops vendors with their own credit card facilities having a simple button to pay for content when running on the iPad or pay the 30% tax, it has caused microsoft and others to delay or abandon apps for the iPad, it makes life worse for consumers. It's lose lose. Apples dumbest move. Dumber than maps.

    Tim Cook - tear down that wall.
  • Reply 92 of 105

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    I doubt it. They'll have to charge up front for Office apps, Apple will get their 30%, and Office will be likely be the profitable suite of apps in record time. MS would lose more than MS would. Now, if WP8 was popular I think it would be a different story.


     


    I am not sure what you are trying to say here, did you mean to say 'Apple would lose more than MS would.'?


     


    I also understood that the Office suite for iOS would be subscription based -- with the current understanding of Apple's policy would mean Apple would collect 100% and then cut a check to MS for their 70% retaining 30% for the duration. I am not sure subscription type sales were really thought of much like this before but when I bought last seasons subscription to "Breaking Bad" I am pretty sure that the TV producers had to settle for the 70% (or sell DVD's) at the end of the season.

  • Reply 93 of 105


    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

    It's simple. This policy is wrong and misguided. It stops vendors with their own credit card facilities having a simple button to pay for content when running on the iPad or pay the 30% tax, it has caused microsoft and others to delay or abandon apps for the iPad, it makes life worse for consumers. It's lose lose. Apples dumbest move. Dumber than maps.


     


    Complete foolishness.

  • Reply 94 of 105


    OK   thanks for your input Microsoft,


     


    We have examined your application to waiver our Terms & Conditions.


     


    Our decision as outlined below.....


     


     


    GTFO

  • Reply 95 of 105

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post





    annoymouse the great defender of the IAP ripoff. Not getting paid by Apple but their greatest defender.

    It's simple. This policy is wrong and misguided. It stops vendors with their own credit card facilities having a simple button to pay for content when running on the iPad or pay the 30% tax, it has caused microsoft and others to delay or abandon apps for the iPad, it makes life worse for consumers. It's lose lose. Apples dumbest move. Dumber than maps.

    Tim Cook - tear down that wall.


    Yeah   OK


     


    Thank you


     


    President Reagan


     


    Your comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the 'Apple Business Model' is outstanding!

  • Reply 96 of 105
    I am not sure what you are trying to say here, did you mean to say 'Apple would lose more than MS would.'?

    I also understood that the Office suite for iOS would be subscription based -- with the current understanding of Apple's policy would mean Apple would collect 100% and then cut a check to MS for their 70% retaining 30% for the duration. I am not sure subscription type sales were really thought of much like this before but when I bought last seasons subscription to "Breaking Bad" I am pretty sure that the TV producers had to settle for the 70% (or sell DVD's) at the end of the season.

    The opposite. I think MS would lose more than Apple would if MS doesn't bring MS Office to iOS. People aren't buying iDevices primarily for Office apps. They might be very useful at times and add considerably value to certain users but if they aren't on iDevices it won't push people from buying an iDevice or push them to WP8 or WinRT devices. This is a huge market for MS to tap just as MS Office is highly profitable for MS on Mac OS X.
  • Reply 97 of 105

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post


     


    So you would prefer people who use MS at work, and have Office, buy a Surface. That is the absurdity of these rules.



     


    Well .......


     


    Considering it carefully, the absurdity (ridiculousnessludicrousnessincongruityinappropriatenessrisibilityidiocystupidityfoolishnessfollysillinessinanityinsanityunreasonablenessirrationalityillogicality,pointlessnesssenselessnessinformal craziness [pick one only])


    of buying a surface, is the only way to go  ;-)


  • Reply 98 of 105

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post





    The "rambling post" was clear enough.

    .........................................................................[content removed for clarity]


     


    Yep, as clear as mud.


     


    hehe

  • Reply 99 of 105
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by OzExige View Post


     


    Yep, as clear as mud.


     


    hehe



    I am working on a a remedial version for ya. With pictures. 

  • Reply 100 of 105
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    The opposite. I think MS would lose more than Apple would if MS doesn't bring MS Office to iOS. People aren't buying iDevices primarily for Office apps. They might be very useful at times and add considerably value to certain users but if they aren't on iDevices it won't push people from buying an iDevice or push them to WP8 or WinRT devices. This is a huge market for MS to tap just as MS Office is highly profitable for MS on Mac OS X.


     


    What Apple would gain from it's 30% would take a long time to make up for a few tens of thousand defectors to surface, or Android, because Office is not there. (And tens of thousands is low balling.)


     


    Same with the Kindle Fire, people who prefer their Kindle app experience to have an integrated purchasing facility within the app, might defect to the Fire. A few tens of thousands of defectors ( again, low balling) and Apple loses a few hundred euro each, it needs to sell millions of e-books to make it up. iBooks wasn't worth pissing off Amazon. 

Sign In or Register to comment.